Indonesian presidential candidate Jusuf Kalla, accompanied by his wife Mufidah Jusuf Kalla, speaks to his supporters during a rally in Malang, East Java province July 4, 2009.

INDONESIA ELECTION EYE – Goldman flags post-vote risks

AKARTA (Reuters) – The following is a snapshot of recent developments in Indonesia’s presidential election campaign ahead of voting on July 8.

Three presidential-vice presidential teams are running: President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and his deputy, former central bank governor Boediono; former President Megawati Sukarnoputri and her deputy, Prabowo Subianto; and Vice President Jusuf Kalla and his deputy, Wiranto.

The source of each report is in brackets.

GOLDMAN REVISES UP GROWTH FORECASTS, HIGHLIGHTS POLL RISKS

* Goldman Sachs has revised up its 2009 Indonesian economic growth forecast to 4.2 percent from 3.5 previously, while lifting its 2010 growth forecast to 5.2 percent from 4.5 percent helped by resilient domestic demand and stimulus measures. Goldman highlighted four issues to monitor after the July 8 vote, including the formation of a credible cabinet, any leadership change in the Golkar Party, the nomination of a new governor of the central bank and the implementation of fiscal stimulus. Further ahead, it said longer-term challenges included institutional reforms, infrastructure plans, protecting the credibility of monetary policy and consolidiation of the fiscal position.

(Goldman Sachs: Asia Economics Flash)

KALLA AND MEGAWATI URGE POLL BODY TO REVISE LISTS

* Kalla and Megawati have called on the General Election Commission (KPU) to fix what they said were huge irregularities in the electoral roll and allow citizens to use identity cards to vote. The candidates stopped short of calling for the election to be delayed, but in a joint statement said they could call for a delay if the KPU rejected their allegations that millions had been left off the final list while tens of millions of duplicate names remained. The candidates said they would meet KPU officials on Monday. (Jakarta Post, Bisnis Indonesia, Kompas, Jakarta Globe, Republika, Media Indonesia)

ELECTION WATCHDOG WARNS PUBLIC OVER CAMPAIGN VIOLATIONS

* The public should monitor possible campaign violations during the three-day calm period, including displaying campaign banners or handing out cash to voters, said Wirdyaningsih, a member of the Election Supervisory Board (Bawaslu). (Jakarta Post, Bisnis Indonesia)

PDI-P SECRETARY GENERAL SAYS READY TO LEAD THE PARTY

* Pramono Anung, secretary general of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), said he would be interested in taking the leadership of the party if Megawati stepped down from her post after the election. (Jakarta Globe)

He finished just eight votes ahead of former senator Rick Santorum in the Midwest state of Iowa.
Ron Paul came third, while Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann settled into a second tier of candidates.
Rick Perry indicated he was suspending his campaign after finishing fifth.
The caucus meetings were the first time voters had a say in the race to face Democratic President Barack Obama in November’s presidential election.

Tuesday’s contest launched months of caucuses and primary elections in 50 states, Washington DC and other territories, culminating in the Republican National Convention in August where the party nominee will be formally anointed.
Iowa was not expected to settle the contest – John McCain, the eventual Republican nominee in 2008, came fourth in the state’s caucuses that year – but it will help shape the race for the White House.

The BBC’s Mark Mardell says that in the end, this result has to be good for Mitt Romney, achieving it in a state he hadn’t bothered to fight until the last few weeks.
‘Game on!’
Hours after caucuses closed, Iowa party chairman Matt Strawn announced that Mr Romney had won by just eight of the 122,255 votes cast.
“Governor Mitt Romney received 30,015 votes and senator Rick Santorum received 30,007 votes. Congratulations to governor Mitt Romney, winner of the 2012 caucuses. Congratulations to senator Rick Santorum for a very close second-place finish,” Mr Strawn said.
Earlier in the evening, Mr Romney kept his sights firmly trained on Mr Obama rather than engaging his Republican rivals or claiming victory.
“The gap between his promises four years ago and his performance is as great as anything I’ve ever seen in my life,” he said, before crying: “On to New Hampshire!”
As early results came out pointing to a close race, Mr Santorum declared “Game on!” He praised his faith and his family in a speech which marked his own entry to the national spotlight.

Mr Paul, a Texas congressman, finished third and vowed to continue onto New Hampshire, which holds a primary election next week.
“This momentum is going to continue,” he told a jubilant crowd of supporters. “We will go on, we will raise the money.”

Negative advertising
Finishing fifth, Texas Governor Rick Perry said he was returning to his home state in order to “determine whether there is a path forward for myself in this race”.Former House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich, who saw a brief lead evaporate under a barrage of negative advertising last month, pledged to remain in the race and challenge Mr Romney, “a Massachusetts moderate”.
“We are not going to go out and run nasty ads,” said Mr Gingrich, who finished fourth.
“But I do reserve the right to tell the truth. And if the truth seems negative that may be more of a comment on his record than it is about politics.”
Mrs Bachmann, a Minnesota congresswoman who won the Iowa straw poll last summer, finished sixth, and urged voters not to let the media anoint a Republican nominee based solely on the Iowa results.
Former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman was on the ballot, but did not campaign in Iowa.

So you think you can run for president

ONE of the things I admire about Jonathan Bernstein’s blogging on the political science of the presidential race is the determinative role he grants to media treatment of the candidates. Not because, as a member of the media, I like to feel important; if anything reporters and commentators usually like to pretend they play as small a role as possible in influencing the public’s choices. Rather, it’s because the analysis strips away the fiction that the media are a neutral communications channel between candidates and voters, and turns attention towards the real influence that the media’s natural biases—the bias towards surprise, the bias towards cliched sentimental background stories, the bias against sophistication or complexity, etc—exercise on campaigns. This years Republican primaries have provided an excellent illustration of the power of a theory of presidential campaigns that grants media narratives a central role, because only such a theory can explain the apparently crazy swings in support we’ve seen amongst all the candidates except Mitt Romney.

Here’s how Mr Bernstein describes what’s at stake in Iowa.

Perhaps the most important point of all: It probably doesn’t matter what order the top three finish in, as long as Romney, Paul, and Santorum occupy the top three spots. The biggest consequence will be that the other three campaigns will be almost certainly irreparably damaged…

As for the top three, what matters isn’t the results in Iowa, but how those results are spun and how they affect the coming states. Three things produce post-Iowa spin: the raw difference between expectations, generally determined by polling, and actual results; how party actors react; and media biases. The first, the expectations game, will favor Santorum, since just a week ago he was still in a jumble for fourth place. Media biases that matter favor new things, unexpected things, and keeping the contest alive for as long as possible; all of those will tend to help Santorum. Another dynamic to watch: Will Santorum’s surge persuade undecided conservatives to rally around him? If so, a strong pro-Santorum spin would lead to a big bounce in New Hampshire and make him competitive in South Carolina and perhaps beyond.

The critical issue, in this account, is the directionality of the storyline taking shape in the media. Media bias towards the unexpected plays a crucial role. Things that don’t play a major role in this account include candidates’ stances on issues, longstanding popularity of certain candidates with particular constituencies, or even the strength of candidates’ efforts to sell themselves to constituents via advertising, organisation, and so forth.

Obviously, what Mr Bernstein is talking about here is the discrete effect of the Iowa caucuses on the campaign. Candidates’ positioning on issues, organisational efforts, advertising and so forth may have been significant earlier in the campaign and may resume playing a role later, once the field is winnowed down. But if you take this view, the effects of the Iowa caucus, or rather how it is spun, will dwarf any such factors; and the spin will dwarf the actual results themselves. This view comports with Nate Silver’s astute remarks just before Mr Santorum began his recent surge in Iowa:

This is also a case in which the polling may actually influence voter behavior. In particular, if one of these candidates does well in the highly influential Des Moines Register poll that should be published on New Year’s Eve or thereabouts, that candidate might be a pretty good bet to overperform polling as voters use that as a cue on caucus night to determine which one is most viable.

I’d also pay a lot of attention to the press coverage for each candidate. Right now, for instance, there seem to be a fair number of stories about Mr. Santorum, which suggests that it is his turn to “surge” in the polls.

Overall, this emphasis on the storytelling aspect of the campaign, and on the snowballing effects of rising popularity due to positive media coverage because your popularity is rising (or the converse, on the way down) seems to me to be the only theory of the primaries compatible with a year of polls.